Highlight

Join the BBA!
Or Renew Your Membership Now!

The BBA’s new program year is about to begin. You won’t want to miss our cutting-edge educational programs, networking events that will help you grow your business, and more. Click here to join or renew.

Highlight

Read Beyond the Billable

The BBA's Public Service blog, Beyond the Billable is your one stop shop for everything Public Service at the BBA. Check it out here.

From Issue Spot: Sequestration to Solution

The term “budget sequestration” refers to automatic categorical federal spending cuts. We are now seeing the immediate results of the sequestration enacted in the Budget Control Act of 2011 that kicked in on March 1, 2013. The federal judiciary has been amongst the hardest hit. Operating on an annual, nationwide $7 billion appropriation, less than 0.02% of the total federal budget, the courts have long been stretched thin. However, with the latest sequestration resulting in a loss of about $350 million, roughly five percent of its budget, the courts are at their breaking point. The cuts have resulted in mandatory furloughs, hiring freezes, the elimination of numerous positions, training cutbacks, decreases in courthouse security, and major budget hits for indigent defense providers.

This dire situation even prompted some judicial vigilantism when a New York District Court judge took matters into his own hands. In United States v. Laron Spicer, Judge Sterling Johnson Jr. held that although jurors merited protection due to a defendant gang member’s record of witness tampering, he could only afford to keep their names secret. He refused to provide them with any additional safeguards, citing the multi-million dollar price tag associated with sequestering a jury.